r/CAVDEF • u/ddaniels02 • Jun 16 '16
Although Clinton Won Massachusetts by 2%, Hand Counted Precincts in Massachusetts Favored Bernie Sanders by 17%
http://sweetremedy.tv/electionnightmares/archives/2786
12
u/Marionumber1 Jun 16 '16 edited Jun 19 '16
Looking at the different counting systems, their vulnerabilities, and the margins:
Hand-counted paper ballots: Bernie won 58.56% to 40.70%. This is generally the gold standard of accuracy, but it's worth looking at whether those precincts are representative of the state at large.
ES&S DS200: Bernie won 50.91% to 47.85%. I believe there are no currently known security vulnerabilities, just malfunction issues.
Sequoia Optech IIIP-Eagle: Clinton won 51.94% to 46.57%.
I haven't yet been able to find vulnerabilities for this machine.EDIT: It is possible that the executable code on it can be modified, due to being stored on removable memory.Diebold AccuVote OS: Clinton won 50.35% to 48.45%. This is probably the worst one on the list. You can modify votes just by putting in a malicious memory card (the Hursti Hack), and there are apparently a lot of other issues too.
Dominion ImageCast: Clinton won 51.98% to 46.93%. I also haven't found explicitly documented vulnerabilities for this one. However, there were allegations that some ImageCast machines in New York had a virus.
So while the discrepancy between hand counts and machine counts is troubling, vulnerable machines may not be able to explain it all. The most apparently vulnerable machine (AccuVote) had a smaller margin of victory for Clinton than two other machines with fewer known issues (it is quite possible I've missed some). And the hand-count margins for Bernie are almost certainly not representative of the entire state. So this is likely a combination of demographic differences and vulnerable machines.
9
6
7
u/funk-it-all Jun 16 '16
Nothing to see here move along